Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death Date

Osama bin Laden SC Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death Date

Wagging The Dog (media, citizens) Operation Confirmed

By CPT Pamela Barnett, USA Retired* (Author Obama Never Vetted:The Unlawful President) Copyright 2012

Obama lied to every American and the rest of the world about the date of the alleged Osama Bin Laden killing, according to recently released Department of Defense emails.  (Email redactions by DOD) According to a live speech (White House link and alternate link) given to the country late night on May 1, 2011, Obama stated “Today at my direction the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound (where Osama allegedly was) in Abbottabad, Pakistan.  A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability.  No Americans were harmed.  They took care to avoid civilian casualties.   After a fire fight they killed Osama Bin Laden and took custody of his body.”

The emails in my possession received directly from the Department of Defense as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request  for Osama Bin Laden’s killing and burial related documents, reveal that the mission to allegedly “kill Osama” occurred April 28, 2011 or earlier, not May 1, 2011, as Obama claimed.

perez 150x150 Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death Date      In one of the emails with a date time of April 29, 2011, 4:58 AM,  Rear Admiral (Lower Half) Samuel Perez asks an unidentified email sender (Redacted) regarding the “burial”: “Do I need any special religious/ceremonial preparations?”  Email strings that were released concerning the alleged burial of Osama go back to April 28.  This means that “Osama” (or possibly someone else) was killed April 28, 2011 or earlier.

 Early Morning Email From RDML Samuel Perez Asking About Burial April 29

PEREZ EMAIL Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death Date

Email From Rear Admiral Kurt Tidd Morning Of April 28 to RDML Perez Regarding BurialWith Daily Update (27 APR 2011) Subject Header

OSAMA TIDD EMAIL Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death Date

 Obama continued to lie to the American people two other times in his speech that Osama was killed that day – May 1, 2011.

At 6.13 minutes, Obama stated “Tonight I called President Zardari and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts. They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations,” stated Obama.

At  8.37 “Today’s achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country,” stated Obama.

So why did Obama lie about the date that Osama was killed?  Was it timed to further control the media by giving them a new, sexier story than a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals hearing the next morning in Pasadena, CA, that confirmed that Obama’s real, unforged Constitutional credentials had/have NEVER been vetted by any court or anyone in any State or Federal government agency?  The court eventually ruled that no one had standing after the 2008 election, except possibly a candidate; and Ambassador Allen Keyes was not running for President again, so the case was dismissed.  This video is very important in understanding how the federal courts continue to fraudulently weasel out of hearing Obama ineligibility cases and how the federal courts have taken away our right to petition the federal court regarding unconstitutional issues.

For the first time, the major news networks were going to cover an actual court hearing on Obama’s ineligibility and fraud crimes the very next morning.  Obama and his operatives saw this coming and wanted to further keep the American people and the media in the dark regarding his ineligibility, forged documents, and use of a Connecticut social security number never assigned to him.  (See related story Was “Osama Killing” Obama Wagging The Dog?)

Surprisingly, or not surprisingly, Rear Admiral (Lower Half) Samuel Perez and other high level military and other government officials let the lie on Osama’s alleged day of death stand.  What else is being lied about by Obama and military officials regarding the alleged death of Osama Bin Laden?

On a boat of over 6,000 sailors, only a handful of witnesses?  Where were all of the on-duty sailors?

Did those unnamed men in leadership even look in the body bag?  Anything or anyone could have been in the bag.

gaouette photo 150x150 Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death DateAlso, the Department of Defense, in their Freedom of Information Act response, stated that the USS Carl Vinson (the carrier in which Osama’s body was allegedly dumped) had no documentary evidence of Osama’s burial.  However, in the released emails RDML Charles M. Gaouette stated: “The paucity of documentary evidence in our possession is a reflection of the emphasis placed upon operational security during the execution of this phase of the operation.”

Paucity means a small amount.  So the military leadership in coordination with Obama’s DOD stated that there is no documentary evidence (a lie), even though RDML Gaouette had said there was a “paucity” of evidence.

Email Where RDML Gaouette Stated That Documentary Evidence of    “Osama’s Burial” Existed

OSAMA GAOUETTE EMAIL Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death DateOSAMA GAOUETTE EMAIL 2 Obama, Military Leaders Lied About Osama’s Death Date

Was Rear Admiral (lower half) Charles Gaouette relieved from command because he did not like that the U.S. military and Obama were lying to the American people? Was the admiral being set up by the Obama administration for not wanting to keep the Osama lie quiet? From mynorthwest.com.

Navy Admiral kicked off his ship, sent back to Bremerton. Why?

A man who climbed the Navy’s ranks over a long career has been unceremoniously removed as commander of the USS Stennis Carrier Strike Group and sent back to the homeport in Bremerton.

A U.S. Navy spokesperson is not giving an explanation for the change, other than to say that questions had arisen about Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette’s “leadership judgment.” …….

……..NBC News interviewed Neal Zerbe, a retired Navy Captain, who says, “The particular commander being relieved, and you know translating that to just moving him back to a continental U.S. base while the investigation continues, is unlike anything I’ve ever seen before.”

If you plan on going to see the new Osama killing movie Zero Dark Thirty this weekend, citizens of this country and the world should consider taking the movie more as a work of fiction to prop up Obama than a work of non-fiction.  The Obama administration’s lies continue.

*Use of military rank is NOT  an endorsement by the Department of Defense or Department of the Army.

 

Obama Attorney Attempts To Silence Opposition In RICO Case

Obama Forward SC 690x1024 Obama Attorney Attempts To Silence Opposition In RICO Case

Barack Obama’s attorneys attempted to intimidate an attorney in a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) case regarding Obama’s forged Hawaii birth certificate, forged Selective Service Registration (Draft Card), and Obama’s use of a social security number never assigned to him according to federal database (E-Verify).  See here and here.  The next hearing on this case is Friday, Nov. 16 at 1 p.m. at the federal court house at 245 W. Capitol St. in Jackson, MS (open to the public.)

Scott Tepper, Esq (attorney for Obama) sent an email threat to sanction Orly Taitz, Esq. (the plaintiff representing herself in the federal RICO case) because she filed an affidavit that shows that the “Obama birth certificate” that Tepper filed with the court was further altered from the original forgery at whitehouse.gov.  This case was filed in the Southern District of Mississippi with the Honorable Henry Wingate, a Ronald Regean appointee, now presiding.

From a pleading filed by Taitz -

Tepper e-mailed Taitz and other plaintiffs a proposed settlement offer, where he wanted Taitz not to make any “defamatory remarks” about defendants and their attorneys and pay $25,000 attorneys’ fees to Attorney Begley or otherwise defendants will go after Plaintiffs seeking a much higher amount. Considering the fact that neither Taitz nor any of the Plaintiffs have stated anything defamatory, that all of their statements were true statements based on sworn affidavits and neither have done anything frivolous to warrant any award of fees, Taitz believes that this “offer” was a form of intimidation, particularly an intimidation of coplaintiffs and desire to silence Taitz and co-plaintiff’s regarding modifications in the image of the alleged birth certificate, which was sent by Tepper to the director of Health Loretta Fuddy. Further Tepper and Begley engaged in a campaign of harassment and intimidation, appeared on the radio, specifically RCR blogtalk radio, where they threatened that they will be going after the house of Taitz. This was done with a clear desire to intimidate and harass not only Taitz, but her whole family, her husband and her 3 children. 

In light of all of the tyrannical vote fraud nationwide in this recent presidential election, this could be one of the last opportunities to bring Obama to justice.  This could be the last line in the sand against complete tyranny in the federal government and our elections systems.  Showing up will let the judge know that there is great importance and public interest in this case and that the American people will not let this denial or rights regarding the usurper President Barack Obama stand.

Photo credit: Dave Merrick

Obama’s “Birth Announcement” Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

This article was produced as the result of research presented in the newly released Amazon e-book Obama Never Vetted: Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America, and poses two important issues:

Barack Obama’s “birth announcement” Microfilm has been tampered with, according to photographic evidence.

• Original Obama “birth announcement” newspapers sold for a high price. If Obama’s name was in those papers, why hasn’t someone come forward with the newspapers?

First of all, if you haven’t already looked at Obama’s birth certificate at whitehouse.gov, you need to see with your own eyes that it is a forgery. The easiest way to tell this is to zoom to at least 800% into the alleged signature of his mother “Stanley Ann Dunham”. You can clearly see the difference in the different sections of the signature. For example, you can see what was a photocopy of a hand-drawn section connected to a computer-drawn solid black graphic section. The “State Registrar Stamp” is also a giveaway that it is a forgery, just look for the “X” instead of the “H” in the word “THE”. This anomaly did not exist until Obama’s alleged birth certificate was posted at whitehouse.gov.

Also, because this “Obama birth document” is allegedly typed in 1961, all of the typefaces should be the same for each typed letter. Look at the word “Student”; the lowercase “t’s” are completely different shapes. And in the name “Hussein” under the father’s name, the “U,I,N” are larger than the other letters. Someone working for Obama has lessened the quality and the sharpness from the original, so these differences are harder to see than in the original. The below snapshots are from the “birth document” posted at whitehouse.gov as of 11/4/12.

The “t’s” ARE DIFFERENT IN THE SAME WORD

12student Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

THE “U, I, N” ARE ALL LARGER THAN THE REST OF THE LETTERS. IT’S HARDER TO SEE ON THE UPDATED WHITEHOUSE.GOV VERSION THAN IT WAS WITH THE ORIGINAL THAT’S IN MY BOOK.

Hussein SC Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

 

The PDF file at Whitehouse.gov was changed from the original one that was uploaded. The original file had multiple layers because it was a created document – it was created in layers. Currently, only a single layer pdf file of the birth certificate exists at whitehouse.gov, so you cannot see numbers and letters disappearing and reappearing while zooming in and out anymore. However, the above signs of forgery still remain. You can read what the experts have to say on Obama’s birth certificate forgery in my book.

THE ALLEGED OBAMA BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT MICROFILMS

Regarding the microfilms, it has to be established that even if the Obama birth announcements were actually in the newspapers, it does not prove a Hawaii birth. Hawaii parents are/were able to file birth documents in Hawaii as long as they were residents, regardless of the actual birth place of the child. Additionally, no proof was required of the birth; only a written statement had to be made. Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961, and other subsequent Hawaii birth laws that allow registration with no proof, or allow Foreign Birth registration, leaves an opening to claim Hawaii “birth” without it being true. In 1961, once a birth document was filed with the Hawaii Department of Health (including those situations mentioned above as well as from the hospitals), the HDOH automatically issued birth announcements to the Hononlulu Advertiser and Star Bulletin.

People that believe Obama was born in Hawaii typically rely on the microfilm printouts of the “alleged” Obama birth announcements from The Honolulu Star Advertiser and Star Bulletin. Talking heads like Bill O’Reilly pose foolish, illogical questions like “Are we supposed to believe that Obama’s mother planted the birth certificate in 1961 in Hawaii because she wanted Obama to be President?” Maybe a better question would be “How many people from other countries come here illegally to specifically have their children born here so they can obtain U.S. citizenship?

However, none of the alleged more prominent journalists/talking heads, like O’Reilly and Chris Matthews (being the most prominent and most arrogant on the subject), have ever tried to find the original newspapers to confirm whether the microfilms are authentic. They just accepted what was fed to them by the Obama administration.

See this clip of O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly show how foolish they are:

And how foolish CNN is (about 7:40):

And how foolish MSNBC Chris Matthews is (about 3:11):

“HAWAII BIRHT ANNOUNCEMENT” HONOLULU ADVERTISER 8/13/61

cnnbirther Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

Microfilms are easy to crop; paste and replace a new forged reel with the old authentic original reel. I have been to several different libraries and have evaluated this possibility of switching out a reel. It would be very easy as security is minimal.

Unlike producing a forgery of a 1961 newspaper, which would be extremely difficult if not impossible, producing a microfilm forgery would be relatively easy. Knowing this, I tried to track down in Hawaii the newspapers that allegedly had Obama’s birth announcements within them and found that some papers still existed in the 2007/2008 presidential campaign cycle. They were sold to a person unnamed by my contact for a high price according to him. He did not possess them; another antique dealer did. My contact did not know if Obama’s “birth announcements” actually appeared in the newspapers that were sold.

I was able to obtain two original 1961 Hawaii newspapers which include birth announcements from my antique dealer contact. I received five 1961 newspapers all in good to fair shape. Two of the papers obtained contained birth announcements that were completely intact. The existence of these two papers lends credibility to my antique dealer contact’s story of the Obama “birth announcement” newspapers having existed and having been sold.. After all, I just bought 5 newspapers from 1961. See below the photos of the newspaper birth announcements. One is from the Honolulu Star Bulletin dated January 27, 1961, and the other is from the Honolulu Advertiser dated May 5, 1961, just 3 months before Obama’s alleged birth announcements would have been printed.

Honolulu Star Bulletin, January 27, 1961, Front Page.

star bulletin jan. 27 1961 1024x768 Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America

Honolulu Star Bulletin, January 27, 1961, Birth Announcements

newsad1 Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President,The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America

 

Honolulu Advertiser, May 5, 1961, Birth Announcements

newsad2 Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America

Why has no one come forward to help Obama by revealing the original newspapers with the announcement? Obama and his friends are millionaires; if Obama’s name was actually in those newspapers, Obama or David Axelrod or Valerie Jarrett or George Soros would have found them at any cost and plastered them everywhere. There is no advantage of not showing these original newspapers unless the person is getting paid off not to show them if Obama’s announcement isn’t there.

My theory is that Obama operatives could have created fake microfilms with Obama’s announcement added. There is a small finite number of microfilms to replace around the country (a search from awhile ago on worldcat.org came up with about 70-100 locations for the microfilms, but weren’t confirmed so there could actually be less), so replacing existing microfilms wouldn’t take too long. A microfilm printout with “Obama’s birth announcement” would have been more than enough “information” for Hawaii to say Obama was born there, especially with their extremely lax policies of handing out birth certificates.

Given the fact that Obama and his operatives produced a forged Hawaii birth certificate for display at the taxpayer-funded whitehouse.gov website, is it really not so hard to imagine that Obama and his operatives may have altered microfilms from 1961 and then took the forged reels of film and replaced them with the originals? Look for yourself at the photos below. Just another Obama coincidence from his background?

See below the tampered with microfilm from the California State Library. The California State Library Honolulu Advertiser microfilm for Obama’s alleged birth date was completely out of the ordinary. All of the microfilms were the same except two for 1961 the reel the contained Obama’s alleged birth announcement was a completely different color (dark brown when the rest were light gray) and texture (the reel was smooth and all of the rest had a textured finish). The other one was the same color, style, and texture and confirmed to be of the same era as the others by a reel manufacturer. Nothing was known about the Obama brown reel.

OBAMA’S ALLEGED BIRTH MONTH MICROFILM REEL IS VERY DIFFERENT

advertiser microfilm reels 1024x768 Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

 

Photo by Pamela Barnett from book Obama Never Vetted: The Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America. Showing 5 consecutive months of Honolulu Advertiser 1961 reels. There are 2 reels per month.

OBAMA “BIRTH MONTH” REEL

microfilm reel label 1024x768 Obamas Birth Announcement Microfilm Reels Are Very Different

Photo by Pamela Barnett, Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The Dangerous Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America

Note from Author:

This story contains some photos never seen by the public which will be added to the 2nd edition of the book Obama Never Vetted, The Unlawful President, The National Security Loopholes and Ensuing Conspiracy That Endanger America.

Special Report On Serial Rapist Bill Clinton

The Whistleblower Special Report On Serial Rapist Bill Clinton

With President Bill Clinton back in the news this week at the DNC, Western Journalism’s  Floyd Brown sat down with Marinka Peschmann, author of The Whistleblower: How the Clinton White House Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House and on the World Stage to discuss.

BROWN: President Bill Clinton is back in the spotlight this week thanks to President Obama asking him to be the keynote speaker at the DNC and put his name in nomination. What do you think of that?

PESCHMANN: I think it’s a smart move—politically, not morally because the Clintons get to have it both ways. If President Obama somehow wins re-election, and I emphasis ‘somehow’ here because I think Americans are waking up to Obama and are realizing that they have been sold a bill of goods, Bill Clinton can say, ‘I helped you. You owe me.’ If Obama loses, with Hillary staying as far away as possible from the DNC, she can continue to distance herself from Obama and seek the presidency in 2016. This will give her enough time to re-craft herself, like she did after she left the White House as the scandal-ridden First Lady and hope people forget her starring role in the Obama-Clinton so-called ‘smart power’ foreign policy misadventures. Just ask the people of Iran, and the Coptic Christians in the Middle East for starters. The world is a more dangerous place since President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have taken office.

Morally speaking, people have forgotten that when the Clintons left the White House in 2000, they left dodging indictments. They stayed in power by thwarting investigators and ruining Americans—especially women. That was a mistake. They never should have been placed in positions of power again. History is repeating itself. It’s politics and self-preservation above all else for this crew.

BROWN: Is that why you decided to write your book, The Whistleblower: How the Clinton White House Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House and on the World Stage, now?

PESCHMANN: Yes, Americans deserve to know what has happened in their White House, and they don’t know the truth about the Clinton era. The Clintons, like Obama did, as [Washington Post reporter] David Maraniss’ book [Barack Obama: The Story] reported put several falsehoods … lies in his book. Well, Bill and Hillary re-wrote history in their books, My Life and Living History too. I wrote The Whistleblower to set the record straight.

Over eleven years ago, I had spent seven months undercover (off and on) writing the so-called whistleblower, Linda’s Tripp’s story and the events that led to President Bill Clinton’s impeachment only to discover that both sides of the aisle were wrong—the truth lay in the middle. It was a cloak and dagger adventure. President Bill Clinton was in the White House at the time, and Hillary Clinton was running for U.S. Senator in New York. Contrary to public opinion, Linda was not a gossipy, evil whistleblower bent on destroying the Clintons—rather, she had protected them by towing-the-line and being a Clinton ‘team player’ in the earlier investigations. This is critical in understanding how corrupt politicians stay in power and also explains why Linda tape-recorded Monica Lewinsky for insurance to protect herself from them. Linda was not vilified and smeared over sex in the Oval office. They didn’t target her and try to criminalize her over BJ’s. If you believe that garbage, then I am the tooth fairy. It’s important that people know the facts because it’s happening again, except this time, segments of Americans are under attack, like the military, tea party patriots, conservatives, and people of faith. As Linda once said to me, ‘If you believe nothing else, believe this. If it can happen to me, it can happen to you.” She was right. It is.

BROWN: Why didn’t you write The Whistleblower earlier?

PESCHMANN: I tried to get the book published years ago, but the ‘establishment’ and the ‘experts’ told me to move on because the Clintons were old news. But as we now know, they were wrong. The Clintons are back in power, and now they are currently being re-packaged as moderates and saviors compared to Obama. Don’t fall for it.

During the 2008 Democratic presidential contest when Hillary was running for president, one publisher sat on the proposal and passed on it days after Hillary conceded. Had she won the nomination, I imagine The Whistleblower would have been published then. I don’t think people realize how politicized the publishing industry has become. There were editors who wouldn’t read the proposal because of the topic. I think the public is starting to wake up now.

I’m an unapologetic Christian. I opened the book with one of my favorite scriptures for good reason: “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.” —Ephesians 5:11 (ESV).

Today, we have a media where reporters have stopped chasing facts, stopped speaking truth to power, and started writing spin and publicity stunts disguised as news. As soon as that happened, they ceased being reporters and instead have become publicists for the administration. The same goes for government civil servants, like Linda was—if civil servants stop serving America’s interests and decline to expose corruption if they encounter it, they cease being civil servants and become just as corrupt as the people they serve. That’s what happened to Linda. She used to be a God-fearing patriot whose greatest honor was to serve in the White House, but you can’t serve and survive in an administration that is corrupt without becoming corrupted yourself.

It’s a big reason why America is in trouble today and another reason why I wrote The Whistleblower. Aside from rare exceptions, everything is upside down. Good is now evil; right is now wrong. Common sense is now extreme; depravity is being normalized. We need to eliminate the right/left paradigm because it distorts the truth. If you want to play politics with the Clinton era, then the Left should have loved Linda for protecting the Clintons, and the Right should have loathed her for not blowing the whistle. Not to speak is to speak. I have over 400 footnotes in the book. It’s fully documented. I also released some exclusive audio on my website. Everything is seriously upside down. It’s time to wake up.

(NOTE: Below is Audio #1. You will hear for yourself how Linda protected the Clintons during Travelgate by remaining silent for instance.)

(Summary and transcript is available here.)

As I watched history repeat itself in the Obama White House with the same players, who share the same progressive ideology, and use the same man-made Saul Alinsky tactics and the ‘end justifies the means’ strategies to stay in power as the Clintons did, I tried to get The Whistleblower out again. Thank God I succeeded because history has repeated itself–again. We just saw that in Chairman Darrell Issa’s Fast and Furious investigation—once again, it looks like the administration, including Hillary and Eric Holder who skated during the Clinton era [Travelgate, Whitewater, Pardongate etc], will skate again. Will the Right ever learn? It’s worse now because when you don’t hold corruption accountable, it grows like a cancer. Obama has been able to get away with much more now.

BROWN: Can you expand on how the Clintons are being re-packed as ‘moderates?”

PESCHMANN: Absolutely, compared to President Obama they may appear to be moderates, but that’s fiction—they share the same ideology and outlook for America. I hope people won’t fall for it. Let’s cut through the smoke and mirrors. Consider these two quick examples:

First, domestically speaking, HillaryCare and what is today ObamaCare was the number #1 priority of both the Clinton and Obama administrations. The only difference was during the Clinton era, HillaryCare crashed, and Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress. In Obama’s world, backroom deals and bribes was how ObamaCare was rammed into law.

Second, look at foreign policy. Remember last May when people where surprised when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who incidentally was Monica Lewinsky’s old boss at the Clinton White House, told a Senate Armed Service Committee that the US would seek permission from organizations like the United Nations before intervening in Syria –giving the international community authority over the US military? Bill Clinton did that too when he deployed US troops to Bosnia–under UN command. The Clintons and President Obama have been ceding America’s sovereignty to the United Nations. To ignore these pesky facts is to walk around with your eyes open and yet not be able to see what is clearly in front of you.

BROWN: Did you see the New Yorker report that claimed Tim Russert of NBC’s Meet the Press (who since has passed away) said that according to his sources, Bill Clinton, during his effort to secure an endorsement for Hillary from Ted Kennedy, said to Kennedy “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.”

PESCHMANN: Yes, I did. I am not surprised, it’s more proof that the ‘ends justify the means’, and Bill Clinton will say whatever he has to say to stay in power and command influence when the cameras are rolling, despite how he truly feels about Obama. But, hey, let’s give credit where credit is due, I think Bill Clinton was telling the truth when he said during the 2008 primaries that Obama’s record was the ‘biggest fairy tale’ he had ever seen. I doubt we’ll hear that at the DNC this week.

The Whistleblower is available in paper and e-book versions everywhere including Amazon.com. For more information visit marinkapeschmann.com

35% Of Our Readers Want Government Spending Cut By 75%

The results of our latest poll show that 35% of our readers think that at least three quarters of total government spending should be cut. This would likely include large yet necessary cuts to entitlements, defense/military spending, and welfare programs. 27% of our readers would prefer at least 95% be cut.

Take a look at these results, and let us know what you think in the comments below!

poll results july 5 35% Of Our Readers Want Government Spending Cut By 75%

Vote in our new poll below:

Should Americans be allowed to opt out of entitlements?

View Results

loading 35% Of Our Readers Want Government Spending Cut By 75% Loading ...

70% Of Our Readers Think Obama’s Amnesty Will Hurt His Re-Election Bid

The results of our latest poll show that 70% of our readers think that Obama’s recent amnesty to about a million illegals will hurt if not end his chances of being re-elected this fall. 19% said it would not make any difference.

Take a look at these results, and let us know what you think in the comments below!

Obama Amnesty Poll 70% Of Our Readers Think Obama’s Amnesty Will Hurt His Re Election Bid

Vote in our new poll below:

By how much do you want government spending shrunk?

View Results

loading 70% Of Our Readers Think Obama’s Amnesty Will Hurt His Re Election Bid Loading ...

38% Of Our Readers Don’t Trust The GOP

The results of our latest poll show that 38% of our readers do not trust the GOP to act in the country’s best interests and believe that they are just grandstanding when they say that they are committed to limited government and the Constitution.

Take a look at these results, and let us know what you think in the comments below.

 

poll results June 20 38% Of Our Readers Dont Trust The GOP

Vote in our new poll below:

How Will Obama's Recent Amnesty Affect His Re-Election Bid

View Results

loading 38% Of Our Readers Dont Trust The GOP Loading ...

Majority Of Our Readers Think The Economy Will Cost Obama Most This Fall

The results of our latest poll show that 56% of our readers think that out of four important current political issues, the economy will damage Obama the most. 23% said that Obamacare would cost him the most this fall.

Take a look at these results and let us know what you think in the comments below!

 

poll results June 13 Majority of our readers think the economy will cost Obama most this fall

 

Vote in our new poll below

Do you trust the GOP to act in our country's best interests?

View Results

loading Majority of our readers think the economy will cost Obama most this fall Loading ...

79% Of Our Readers Say Romney Was Not Their First Choice For GOP Nomination

The results of our latest poll show that 79% of our readers believe that the GOP should have selected someone other than Mitt Romney as their  nominee for president.

Let us know what you think in the comments below.

poll results June 6 79% of our readers say Romney was Not their first choice for GOP Nomination

Vote in our new poll below:

Which issue will cost Obama the most support?

View Results

loading 79% of our readers say Romney was Not their first choice for GOP Nomination Loading ...

52% Of Our Readers Think That Romney Should Pick Allen West As His VP

The results of our latest Western Journalism poll show that more than half of our readers think that Allen West should be Mitt Romney’s choice for the VP nod. 18% think that Romney should pick Marco Rubio instead.

Take a look at these results, and let us know what you think in the comments below!

poll resylts May 30 52% of our readers think that Romney should Pick Allen West as his VP

Vote in our new poll below

Was Romney your first pick for the GOP Nomination?

View Results

loading 52% of our readers think that Romney should Pick Allen West as his VP Loading ...